##VIDEO ID:ryudPphZhF4## these should be single family homes not a four-story mixed use shops on the bottom thank you $33,000 a month apartments on top so that the people can get off a bright line and go into their apartment thank you this is what people are upset about not also allowing them to have a single family home here this should all be single family home that's not currently already commercial or mixed you or pre-24 maybe you could say okay so I just wanted to again put that into context that there because those were property rights that were part of this neighborhood prior to that code update the code update put in more residential opens including the single it should be exclusively residential where there is residential not also duplex or also apartments or also mixed use inside of this little neighbor I will also point to the fact that there was a large scale charet in 20 I want to say 2002 that talked about the mixed use character of these neighborhood of this neighborhood was a second yeah there was another update and we did an update to the master plan at that time we heard that there was still a desire to have businesses along East Avenue there's a handful of them today um so I just want to put that into context that that we did hear that from the community we heard the concerns about scale and that's why these other aspects of the zoning code are so important because you have to comply with all of those set packs all of those landscape requirements all of last one and I'll and I'll stop in order to get that on Bahama these one two three four five single family home lots right now are not protected to be single family homes when they're redeveloped they could also be duplex correct this is sfd and I also want to point out that many of these houses are in fact duplexes they're not all single family homes so vacant par these vacant Parcels is what I'm referring to if they're if their property size would allow for that yes corre I I beat it to death I think you guys get where I'm coming from CL and I you know with that with those specifics we definitely need I know that this was advertised but we definitely need the input of those specific owners and the history of the um the Mardi Pharmacy and the other things that the people in the community wanted to keep at least some uh mix use or commercial on East Avenue with regard to like another Mr Richard mardy's house that you talked about on Bahama Avenue there was some of those homes have been knocked down and um but there's also the opportunity that people um because we have to have this public input because that's that's what the form base code asked for um there needs to be a way to I know what you're saying that you people don't want to have large apartment buildings beside them but we do have some apartment buildings uh in East Stewart um but people need to have some way to have affordable housing and to also build so that people can um can live in the area I know what you're saying is that maybe okay it's going to be some monstrosity and it's going to be a Leisure Resort where somebody comes and I don't think so but I think the people who own the property need to have the opportunity to they've they've had input on the land use back in the shet they had input before and definitely as we discussed earlier this morning we need to have their input especially the people who own those specific pieces of land we need to send out a letter to them if we're talking about that make sure that they come to whatever it is whether it's a city council meeting or an LPA meeting they need to have input as to if they're especially going to be down zoned the only reason why things were done in the form based code was to add some specifics to make sure the sense of place was there that the trees that the sidewalks that it maintained that character of East Stewart and those were that if you're going to develop you have to develop like that and you have to to come talk to the community isn't that correct Jesse yeah and it's it won't work at a commission meeting because they only public only has three minutes so it needs to be a workshop and I agree with you commissioner Clark we need to go door too in those neighborhoods make sure those people go down to 10th Street and just like we did for years before we adopted the form base code and make sure people understand the changes being proposed the impact it'll have on their properties and then listen to there are concerns we just can't do this in a vacuum this dramatically in this neighborhood um just for for reference um for the the city initiated um text amendments and Zoning changes um in 2023 um we held four workshops and that was in addition to the uh required community outreach the community meetings like the LPA the board of County Commissioners um we also did door hangers um postcards and of course the required Public Notices um and of course no code is perfect um and we want to make sure that the code always reflects the the community's vision and that and keeps the city um you know within its legal limits Mike or Jody or both could you give us maybe for the next zip or the next commission meeting the history of the zoning through here because it seems like we're trapped in 2004 newer because people didn't want to change anything people didn't want to change anything and so I'd like to see kind of a a history of this entire district and when we sing family do me a favor Chris click on the second icon on the top right right there oh P out there you go that one and then scroll down click on the 2024 and then see if you can click on like 1994 right or 74 I think the 74 one actually has satellite imagery I did it there so that you can see what it looked like will it give you the zing on there well it won't give you the zoning but you can there's no vacant Lots so if you look where all those lots that you were just pointing at that were vacant they won't be vacant they had their houses CL uh so Mr Collins commissioner Collins and everybody a lot of people older people have passed away some people have actually moved out of the area there was a lot of Code Enforcement issues that went down sometime ago one of the largest and biggest code enforcement that went down was in 2017 when the tailor property all of the homes from there were were removed but on the East Avenue section there was the Mardi Pharmacy that had um the pharmacy downstairs and and living upstairs and along East Avenue that was a tradition also along Martin Luther King that was a tradition and a little bit on Central Avenue where Mr Willie had his um bait shop which I think Mr Peterson um now lives in that home but there's a lot of things that uh if you really want to know the history of those properties and if I don't know if any of the owners of the property on East Avenue have contacted you and tell you that they want to put their property into single family but those people I I know that Mr um Odin has come in here and and he wants to build what he considers affordable housing and that would be more than a single family will be a Triplex a duplex or even a four or six um um unit apartment unit the tayor property wants to come in with their property and so you're talking about you know those two areas you mentioned Bahama and East Avenue there's also 10th Street but I think if you want to go that route we need to hear from the owners of those property and we need to listen again if the actual zone is going to change I would say that the form based code cleaned up some things and put some classified some things and it made um mandatory Landscaping mandatory certain drainage mandatory meet the community all those things that's what the form Base called did it did not down zone or the the the East Stewart area it it it did not down Zone and the goal was not to up Zone anyone either because there absolutely is a concern that if you add commercial to a neighborhood that you can upside down the um the economic input in that area the the the liveliness of it as as far as development goes and in fact I'll be happy to share understand I understand what we're trying to do here it feels like Creek District we're trying to make this it's not it's not like ites won't I know that that may be something won to but if if we can have three and four story mixed use right there we're trying to create more busy Energy commercial I want to I want to correct that statement because I will be happy to send to you to the the vision update when 2004 I mrle I'm sorry here that 2004 update that created a proh Prohibition on it may not be form based code it may be 2004 that we need to go back that that made it big dramatic that may have had an impact in the community which is why we took look at updating the code the city requested a look at that code because if you look take a snapshot the the number of single family homes or um even small businesses had diminished over the years and part of it is of course what like commissioner Clark was mentioning but it also we really need to protect our single family home neighborhoods with everything going mixed use right that's why we're trying to designate it as a special air I mean we did for the East Stewart area we have it as a special to truly protect your single family homes in this area you would remove like I'll give you one instead of just complaining I'll give you one actionable thing in sfd you should not be able to do a duplex without commission approval that would be one example if you're going to try to merge lots and do all that the the duplex part of SF that D should not be by right you should have to come in front of the commission to be able to make that be a duplex would that's one action thing so I just wanted to clarify though that's not necessarily um an aspect of the form based code so I don't I don't want the the form part it's not specific the form based code I'm just saying something this code in E Stewart though density that's a different conversation and that has a lot more to do with you know what are the existing property rights and what's the best course of action if you're looking at a down zoning and I can't I can't speak to the mindset of the Commission in 2004 and why they would have gone in that direction but just logically if I wanted to take this single family home neighborhood and have it be developed into mixed use this would be exactly what I would do to it I I can't speak to what was in the sheret in 2002 and in the 2002 sheret is there's a large document that reflects what the vision was and explains what that intention was um the intention was to take a look at the historic fabric of the neighborhood and allow for that again um and it didn't work out exactly as anticipated because you you can see that there are vacant Lots still um on some of those properties so but that was the intent I don't think that there was an ill intent I think there was an intent to take a look at some of the historic properties and historic businesses and make sure that those were continued had an opportunity to continue to be part of the community I don't I don't see I don't understand the value of we're here it's 2024 we can talk to the current owners of these properties we can talk to this community there's no inherent value in the vision in 2002 uh I I don't understand that the town was completely different then the city was completely different then and we need to understand the challenges we face now and the needs that are present now and talk to the people who live in this community and understand what they want and need now not in 20 2 commission Reed yeah I remember I I did attend a couple of the bbased code meetings re Stewart and a lot of those residents weren't happy with the changes exactly um they voiced it tremendously and you know and we talk about the city being different in 2002 it was we had downtown Stewart was commercial and it's expanded throughout areas throughout Colorado tremendously and they want to potentially extend it down caner um down MLK so yes it has changed quite a bit and I think what Comm Collins is trying to say is he's trying to look out for the residents in East St it specifically so they don't have that big development that they don't want of mixed use they want it to stay you know some sort of single residential family development with some commercial yes there is some commercial but they don't want the entire neighborhood to be like Frasier Creek where it's totally mixed use I live in Frasier Creek and um it's very mixed use and and even my neighborhood in particular it has been predominantly commercial at one time and then it's switched over to residential and now it's probably half and half and I think that's what he's trying to express and that's what a lot of the residents feel as well um especially when I door KN through East Stewart and I have spoke with a lot of residents in East Stewart um I've even door kned some after being an elected official and tried to speak with them it's just there's so much going on since a AUST so playing catch up commissioner du yes um I don't know that it was intentional but we do have a situation where we have if three or four plots are together someone buys them and can make them and combine them under the current ruling to be multif Family four-story Apartments whatever so this is the opportunity to correct that because I don't think the people in East Stewart want that that either they want a neighborhood amen an absolute neighborhood where there's family you can walk two blocks go to a local store go get your haircut that's what they're looking for they're not looking for making all of these apartments which will not be affordable I'm sure absolutely okay and that would not benefit that community at all so we need to be able to today and this ZIP um in progress is to correct some of those things that were in unintentional but they exist the reality is if you own four pieces of property in a row you could then combine them and make some sort of mult major multifam housing and I don't think that that would make anyone in East Stewart who owns single family homes would like to see more that is not the vision that they want it's not the vision I want thank you well I know I said 11:15 but how about we break 5 minutes early and take a 15minute break Madam clerk you have the [Music] time e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e guy the jacket he lives in front of me has a truck and he has lots of trucks par right on Central Avenue and then [Music] there Reser your seat pleas oh he's going to ring the bell he's going to ring the bell ma'am what you think I was asking Jodie I was calling you Rosie but he's going to ring the bell Miss cougler can you regain your seat please we wait for Mr  no oh my God I you guys have a question for him we can wait and ask him but for no question know okay can I I'm calling back to order special commission meeting of the steart city commission zip Workshop number three so I think I interrupt you thought you want [Music] um I was just going to add more to you know how how to fix what I think is an issue would be to sequentially go through here and any any of these Parcels that are not on 10th or MLK that are inside of here and currently don't already have some sort of commercial or mixed use thing on there there um for instance off of perfect I could you zoom in a little bit like on Tarpon where we already have single family homes could remain single family homes would be my request and you could allow like to not be in the way of of somebody who owns like a property on East for example you could have that be single family home but allow something more expansive under conditional use right so to hyperfocus on East I'll come off with TP and back back to East you know right now we have that zoned that purple is mixed use that is that could be very intensive commercial that that could be a lot of different things um and it has been Zone commercial and basically been vacant through there since some of you who have been doing this longer than me probably have the an the 70s I don't probably 60s 60s since we desegregated basically it's it's been U vacant so allowing that to be single family or if you wanted to do mixed use with conditional use um obviously the Housing Authority is that is what it is but anything that's already single family home should stay single family home um you know both here and if we move over towards like carpent and then if it's up against 10th or MLK where there is more of that office residential or potentially um more intensive use that would make more sense but anything that's in this interior in the pur yeah any of those that that that very very much should be single family home unless you come in for conditional use and want to do some sort of uh because otherwise you could have somebody buying up one two three four of those Parcels again when bright line comes there's not been the development pressure on this area that there's about to be ever and if you own one of those Parcels you you might be very excited about that because you're going to be able to sell them but if you live in that neighborhood and you're you're not going to be able to benefit from that sale directly the implications of what could be built there we need to be looking at how to protect this neighborhood and not just make this as profitable for people as possible to develop okay so you can with conditional use well since the 70s or 60s that's been vacant there I mean on on East right so if you made that single family home for instance and within conditional use you could come in and we could be reviewing that if that makes sense you know it's not a one siiz at all they right but you would Zone it by right as single family you would protect that nature of it so if somebody comes in by been traditional since when again it's been vacant since the 60 I definitely have to have make sure that all those property owners are notified I'm sure those Property Owners want it to stay mixed use because it could be something very intensive that they could build and be very who who it's important to is also all of those other people that will be affected by us allowing that on that parcel so again my my recommendations would be if there's a single family home on it it should be yellow uh if we go up towards uh Tarpon like that North part of Tarpon there right you've got all that green that office grro if that's got a single did you you still have the pointer Chris the school yes that would be helpful right so if I'm here like how many of those are single family home that should with one swipe be yellow and if you wanted to make that with conditional use that you could go grro that you're not just denying anybody anything but with conditional use you can go grro and then if you move back towards the left Chris on East right any of these would be single family home by right and then under conditional use if you wanted to make that bmu as well now if we're up against MLK if we're up against 10th Street I think you've got a good case for this kind of stuff but in the in the core right this this should all be single family home unless it already has something commercial or office on it you know but any of those any of those should be zoned single family home including ease right but with but with conditional use you could have bmu would be my that's the recommendations I would want to see and I think that protects by right this neighborhood continuing to be single family and instead of somebody coming in and buying up four of these vacant parcels and putting a three-story building as long as they can park it you know um they would have to come in front of us to get that conditional use would be my recommendations if you guys got that my thoughts Jody and Mike speak that what's your's the you want us to leave that steart District parking as is it would be whatever it is with those SL I would say the standards for parking that we have Citywide should also apply to East Stewart as well other so that that would have a comment just to acknowledge again E Stewart has for a long time had a different parking rate because of in large part the small size of the Lots so if you required um for a single family home too many parking spaces um it would actually eat up a large amount of their Frontage um in the the front of the building so you would have neighborhoods where um you'd have a pration of even more cars in in the front so that's just something to consider and how that impacts the existing small is single family to Citywide is that and it's one eastart um and as far as um you know transportation in East Stewart and it is a large population with a onear family um me the only difference is we're talking about having people parking in the front yards there's still people parking it's the same thing it it's just you're making it Citywide I just wanted to add that it doesn't block out people from living or parking there it's just there's not a driveway for maybe for that additional car but they wouldn't be permitted then Jody now they can't provide 2.5 if somebody comes in to build a single family home on each Steward they have to have one space for a car if they came to build anywhere else St they have two spaces dedicated car well the front the frontage lot is shorter some of them are 40 50 feet there're smaller lots and that's what otherwise they won't be able to build they won't guaranteed what was the parking requirements historically I and I think a lot of these Chris like they are smaller Lots right so I have a 10,000 foot lot so I have plenty of space to park but some of these are 3,000 4,000 they don't meet the minimum so you're paying property taxes on something that you wouldn't be able to develop and that's that's tough well I don't know who's paying property what is reles to not being able to develop they can develop a lot right now buildable they are buildable but if we increase parking I mean some of these you know I don't know that I don't think we needt just parking in the EAS and that's what I was saying historically what has what has it always been I think less less it's always been one perant are the single family homes I would say you're talk so that's where you can okay so that that that clarifies it then yeah I think more so with multif family if you guys can look at that and historically if if we're talking if someone's coming in for a conditional use the entire city code throughout the city of Stewart is written to where most applications outside a single family come in front of the board regardless um and that's where the public gets upset because we Grant exceptions but if you don't Grant any exceptions you wouldn't even develop that parcel anyway so most projects in the city of Stewart come before the board regardless um and if we have those updated parking requirements for multif family what your your starting point for how dense it would be in this single family home neighborhood be less but I can I can give you another good scenario so if you look at say a 300 apartment complex versus a 20 apartment complex the 20 apartment complex they're always going to be full with parking that one with 300 Apartments typically would not be in my opinion because there's more typically the more you have the less that goes under the engineer whatever the it traffic standard say bigger the complex is the more likely that there shared spaces available because more people are on at different times and so those spaces become available smaller it is the more likely that everybody would be home which is why you would want to have those more strict standards for for smaller development projects maybe if duplexes multif Family Apartments mixed use correct but depending on the size and the scale you should really look into it I guess I mean a 20 apartment or multi family vers Happening Here on one to three Parcels that are pieced together is is going to be a smaller scale that's really needs to make sense otherwise you're you're setting this neighborhood up for not being Park so three Parcels is going to be less than half correct so we need to make sure so so we need to make sure we can park did you have any problem to make just you know the more parking you require the more expensive it is yep and so people who live in it's going to be more difficult for the PE to live in this community to yep concrete costs money it just you can't you have to build a smaller home relative to the parking lot and it's the wealthier people who are going to be able to come in and take advantage of that and dog whistling gentrification we just talked about taking single family home out of that conversation and we're talking about multi all right this is a workshop right so we can have public comment because I I'm G to speak as I I think I'm an expert you know I mean I don't crack bones and stuff so I can't talk to that but I'm gonna talk about residential development here so one of the things that the commission is saying here is like you know what I want to make everything residential in the community but I'm going to sit here and tell you how to do it you have folks here say they want to be at the table to have that disc discussion um now I'm going to you know what go ahead make it all single family it's 0.14 um Acres right I don't even think it's 3,000 square foot I'm going to build a house on it all right I think everybody saying they want to go to 6,000 square foot for residential homes that's one and then the second part you want to have setback requirement so what's going to happen in this neighborhood is we're going to have a big garage and a little door on the side and then you will have you know how many car cuz I guess the afraid is that people are going to be parking at like an apartment complex and have like 10 cars there I don't understand the concept behind that however when you now have these lots that are undevelopable because they're too small don't worry about them assembling them to build apartments or duplexes right they now have to go out and buy the other property just so they could build something there if the house get damaged by Hurricane now guess what I got to go figure out if my neighbor is also d so I can buy his lot so I can now build a host based on what you're basically putting on them without looking at this with input from professionals and the neighbors that are actually living there that house you try to build a single family house right now 1,800 square foot ground up okay that can win that hurricane you looking at $280,000 and that's just a hard cost for that house now let's go we're going to do all of these single families that's going to cost 280 don't include land value don't include all the money you have to go for spending so you're going to spend about 350 on this lot that's in Stewart guys yes that's affordable because when I turn around and I want to sell it even for like a 1% profit I'm at minimum selling it for 360 God bless these guys affording that in that neighborhood but thank you very much for making it all single family residential without talking to the people that are living there so you guys need to be thinking about this as you're looking at it if you had a discussion around the table with professional at the table doing that all of these points can be brought up I'm not saying you're not going to hit what you want to try to do for that neighborhood but at the same time you're sitting here dictating what needs to happen without that input that's idiotic and I've seen it happen thank you sir I think it's easy to advocate for this and not be a single family home neighborhood when you don't live there and your goal is to develop it Mr JY I I think if we start interacting with the public the meeting can easily get derailed again any individual you want to speak with you're free to call them and ask them to call you I I appreciate your concern any other comments regarding this Mr mortal do you feel you have I don't have a s i mean I have some comments I'm keep moving again we have to you know we have to see the language from M right now I'm bringing back the comments about Bayou and Tarpon and having that be uh single family by right and the grro being conditional use parking will be that single family home stays at one space per parking and multif family will meet the requirements of the city commission well any multif family is my excuse but not single yeah so I just single family is what I said was by right and then anything else was by do we know if um historically um East Stewart neighborhood has always had no minimum lot size historically Mike well so if you go back when was there no zoning at all right when downtown Stew was built there was no LPA there was no code at all so it all started out with no zoning when East Stewart was initially developed or or settled it was no zoning and so the Lots were divvied up by a plat at the smaller sizes you look off of like Alamanda and uh Flamingo and those streets there's a lot of the Lots that were platted at 25 ft MH um so a lot of those Parcels over there are now three recorded lot equal one build parcel and so when you look at that back in the 50s or whenever it was platted they were platted almost as a mobile home park and 25 foot thank youen but when you go back to it over time zoning has created R1 being a minimum of 75 ft and then or r1a being 75 feet and 10,000 square feet and then you also get into not just the lot size of square footage but historically the city of Stewart has required a 50 foot lot Frontage in order to be a legal or minimum lot and it was even long bigger than that 75 ft and 60 ft and 90 ft 100 ft and it's taking with so if you have a 40 foot wide lot but it's 200 feet deep that would be an 8,000 foot lot but if it's not 50 fet of Street Frontage in most neighborhoods it can't be built on because even though it's 8,000 square ft it's not 50t wide so it doesn't me the minimum lot width of 50 feet even though it's 8,000 square F feet and he Steward a lot of these lots that are 0.1 0.12 .13 and 0.14 they come out to be around 4,000 square ft or 4500 square fet which would be less than the 5,000 foot minimum lot width that we had predominantly is the cottage lots and they also don't have the 50 Foot width because they're 40 feet wide so they don't meet the minimum lot width even gotcha and I don't I don't think the consensus from the board is to go after minimum lot width or minimum lot size I mean it doesn't exist currently I'm looking at the development standards right now direct there should be minimum lot size based off existing gotta we should go out and either Jess has this data or measure there should be you don't want to have just a so you don't take an acre and do 2,000 or 1500 sare foot law we got to think about what could happen if you look at the footnote that's in the chart it says there's no minimum lot size and that all of those Parcels of record were deemed parcel but no more lot splits can happen so if someone creates or subdivides any of these Lots into a lesser parcel of Records so the question becomes for example if right now you own Lots one and two and it's one parcel of record although there's still Lots one and two can you cut that in half and have lot one have no minimum lot size and lot two have no minimum lot size or is it that it was a parcel of record with a parcel ID number are you looking at the plat or are you looking at the parcel ID number and that's not clear but we'll be bringing that back to you guys to vote on as the issue and so I'm going to revise the notes though because at the first Workshop the board was seeking the 6,000 minimum lot size for the Citywide and now I'm hearing that we're not going to do that to take that out not for East Stewart but it should correct not for but there should be be for the rest of the city because east east Stewart um never had that minimum lot size anyway and it even says for newly ploted Lots it would be 4,365 to protect it going forward you need you need to have some kind of minimum that's based on what's over there not imposed just out of BL and out of the air you should be over there measuring looking at what it is and then to protect it going forward if they're going to change anything they have to still come to us and come to the neighborhood if they're going to make a large development like try to do that yes yeah so then we'll do with it but if there's no minimum lot size there's no restriction there for one of those projects if you piece those four Parcels together um where you would have a maximum then if that's what you're thinking so I just pulled up randomly two lots on coconut um they're not going to meet that minimum lot side um to pull up another one coconut and hibiscus in that area those yeah those won't meet yes that's that's the way that area is coconut El like but even at 4365 they probably don't meet it I used they meet the 4365 0.1 is 4365 so anything above so 0.137 is 6,000 so 0.14 meets it37 doz and you would just grandfather that parcel in it's non-conforming okay so one two it's not the majority 14 I can count 14 we we can do an inventory of it but that's what I'm looking for the verification on because there's a there have to see who's going to be impacted yeah I agree we should in inventory and we should notify those people um can I this this this is really concerning with regard to East Stewart and I know that we have we want to try to get this thing done and come back to bring something to the LPA but I don't know uh if we'll get this part of E Stewart done today and have some notes from staff or even if we don't have notes from staff I really would like to set a time to have something at the 10th Street rec center and give people an idea and let them see this again what is what you're trying to do especially with the Martin Luther King um East Avenue and 10th Street and the idea that um no duplexes within um lots that were with specific to East you're talking about uh um bmu so that's what I perceive as a threat to that neighborhood with bmu on East if the people sell their property it's not that it's going to be what it was historically or it's a drugstore you're talking about potentially a four-story if you can park it um mixed use building and I don't I can't speak for everybody in every neighbor neighborhood but the people I have talked to don't want that there and and I think if we're not paying attention to what we're making making allowable there well we're not we're zoning is what we're allowing um so what my recommendations were is by write single family home but under conditional use if it it could do something else it could come in front of us and we could review it and make sure it's it's you know by right you can't just buy up a bunch of parcels there and build a four story thing no no way and that's what we should want anyway is we want to keep the sense of place for that where the community can come in and we can all talk about it and either it makes sense or it doesn't and so just a a point of clarification the by right if if I can interject is only it's not four stories that was actually something we updated with the exactly yeah it was it 45 ft or 35t it's 30 I think it's 35t but it's three stories three most part for modern building it's very difficult to even get three stories into 35 ft um there was a previously um a provision that allowed for up to four stories again that's what footnote number two is for that's um significant is that that how has to go to the commission and have that Community input in order to get to that four stories whereas previously it was but again three stories and 35 people sure that that's coming in front of us for that a lot happen I mean you know we have to spread a needle here between preserving the charact feel and character of a neighborhood and not denying opportunity for the community to grow I mean you point out you point out that there's been you want to go back 20 years ago and but then you correctly pointed out you said well this land has been empty for decades so what was the value of that zoning if it didn't allow okay so may you know the form based code I think was looking for a means of providing additional opportunity for the neighborhood to grow and develop because that 20y old that 20-y old code was not working it had been vacant for years just like having to buy you know the city did not want to buy the property where project lift is but it's at bacon 30 years and so we saw an opportunity and took advantage of it I think looking back to the past does not necessarily have a value we can see that was not succeed these are very difficult matters commissioner Reed yeah there 's there's also a section uh 8.2.0 it specifically talks about hardship existing non-conforming development in lots and how you can still achieve development if you meet certain criteria you can come in front of the board um so maybe that's a section to look at as well just to make sure people are protect you can't have created the right correct um because I know there was also Mr Mor thing well I mean if somebody if somebody comes in and subdivides a lot that is creating the hardship and therefore you can't do it this is mainly for existing structures the board of adjustment has to it's not it's not a guaranteed right when the board of adjustment was Ru was hearing those they have the right to vote no so if you have a hardship and you want the city to wave the setback or to allow you to build on it you you have to pay for the application you have to go to the public hearing and if they vote no you don't get the right it's just a process to request an exception essentially which is no different than a conditional use just a lesser intensive method but that's we we ran into it a lot when we went from the digital from surveying used to be done by the little Scopes and then went to digital GIS systems and we found that a lot of the Lots were 49 ft wide or 99 ft wide and there was a whole series in the '90s of board of adjustments because these houses when they were going to sell the house was already built and it was built 9 fet from the lot line not 10 feet from the lot line so they couldn't get title insurance so the board of adjustment had to continually Grant these exceptions to the asilt because of the way the survey was done in the past but all that kind of Gone Away now because it's been caught up um nowadays it the question is when we talk about a hardship if you guys were to Grant a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet if in fact having less than 6,000 square feet is considered a hardship and you're allowed to move forward on it then there's no reason to Grant the minimum OD size because it doesn't make any difference they're going to move forward so there's no reason to do it yeah um so you just have to decide how you want to handle we have a recommendation well as it relates to the lot size I'm going to bring back the uh resolution on December uh 9th and we'll have some examples um of parcels that are you know less than what the proposal of the commission is as relates to the minimum l uh commissioner as far as a workshop in 10th street I mean and this is the problem with Commissioners going to public meetings I mean Jess can be advertised for everybody I guess we're going to have to advertise them then the ones I went to and CLK you were there and I was there but we couldn't speak right it was Miss Seymour yeah who conducted it and that really was the we're there to listen anyway yeah um and they have these opportunities to listen to us so well it depends on what you're looking for Jesse I'm not suggesting we impose on you I'm just describing the reality when you guys are talking about having a public hearing at 10 stream I mean this is a public hearing yes right so no but a workshop is different a public Workshop well a workshop is first of all but it's got to be genuine too I mean if you're having a workshop and you're telling the people you're going to do a shet and you want them to give you the development rights then or what they want developed then you're pursuing it from that angle if you're doing it as the city is doing a public notice of a project that's going forward it's not as much of a workshop so like when we did the project lift those public hearings weren't a workshop those were a public notice and we went and we said this is what's happening on this site and we did it to notify the community as to what was being pursued so it's almost like it should be a workshop then so we can engage and find out what they're looking for and that that's my opinion I'm all for it do we need a motion to set something up in the next three weeks Mike why I think we should wait to hear back the specific thing then we'll have an idea of how many properties are affected and then like you say we can go door too well I mean like the 10 Street rec center is not GNA apply to this because in this discussion obviously we're not doing minimum lot size and he Steward as to 6,000 square feet or it would be every lot but if you can't build a DX now right if we're down zoning well I mean it's the pleasure of the board if you guys want to have the hearing now we can have we can schedule a public hearing and do it or if you want to wait after December 9th come back with you can see what we're actually I can talk to the people I know any you think after an idea of how they want to proceed okay what they feel would be the most and we can bring it up I guess at the next commission meeting then okay that would make more sense then and if I I feel as if we're going to have something I feel it should be more in the afternoon maybe like or even after five after after five yeah I would even potentially start it at 4 so at least you can get started because there's times where you know we spend an hour with comments before we get into to things so I think that'll still allow and and also what I did hear is um and E Stewart a lot of times um Thursdays typically work better by the way um people have choir practice and bible studies yeah I've always heard Thursday I think just because there's a already a NAACP meeting on Thursday Seymour is not e an agreement we've used it we've used that comun today also at the correct and I think that would be maybe more appropriate then just for when it does come back up at this board meeting Jessica thp knows the best time at the shet Mike we don't really have commission comment so we don't get well if we're running it like it was it was a moderator and it was yeah a presentation right and then after the presentation you broke into groups groups within the community and then after the tables for a couple hours then they got back up and each table presented to the group what the table had come up with and then the group kind of gave feedback to the table comment commission and to further elaborate just a meeting on the East Stewart neighborhood in general you have two sides at play you have the investors and the developers and you have the people that actually live in that neighborhood and I'm sure most of fellow board members are probably aware and that's where there's this fine balance of what they want and then you have people that are buying up property for redevelopment purposes for density to get a return on their investment instead of it being single family where you live there instead of it being an investment so that's that's mainly what happened there's like five key players in the East Stewart neighborhood to where they have acquired property or slowly acquired property if you look on property appraiser you can see where historically that's what's happening you also need to know there it's not mutually exclusive right many of those families that own the land in E Stewart have owned it for multiple generations and actually do live there so it's not just where it was a developer speculating on land to buy to develop it's actually people that live in the I've never spoken to a developer who want to go these STS a lot of people who who live who live there in in the on who you ask the tor but again the the pressure to develop E Stewart hasn't been there like it's about to be once bright Line's coming in there's not as much left to redevelop it's we got to really make sure we're looking at this carefully and the impact it's going to have on the people that live there not just a bottom line of the people who would want to develop it and even though there are a handful of families that own some of these Parcels what happens when Dad dies or and now bright line and now all a sudden that's getting sold and you know everybody cashed out but this are the things we need to consider commissioned develop yeah I mean I I know sies the tayor property Taylor property Mr Odin the other people who the the Mardi family um but anyhow this is a double-edged sword so um if we make certain rules we want to keep the characteristics we want to do some some things that will allow for vitality and for redevelopment but at the same time uh if we do certain things that the owners of the property find it too hard to develop they're going to end up with hey I can't do anything with this thing I'm just going to have to sell it to the bigger guy and then you end up with nothing that's why it's important to have the people who own the property and they'll say and the main thing is that if we had something like a Community Development Corporation where they had a loan pool or a way to do economic development those people would be able to get a reasonable loan I don't know the market that we are on what happens with the stock market we don't know but they would be able to get a reasonable Loan in order to actually redevelop some of that property but it's not happening because and these families have owned the property a long time they've been holding on to it and some of them are getting very old and it might go off and be sold to somebody because we can't tie their hands too much where if they do want to we have let's just let's just miss miss um Miss Howard Hamilton has has her M rosida the Mr Bell they all have um Mr the the guy on um he he passed away now um I can't think of his name right now but they were on Martin Luther King they all have there's a lot of small apartment buildings and they've work well they're they're not even well some of them are two stories they've worked well in the neighborhood some people may want to still do some of those or some people may want to do even smaller homes on some of these small lots of course we still have the accessory dwelling unit that's allowed on the single family lot if they can meet all the requirements but we really have to be very careful that we don't tie people's hands so that they're like I can't do anything with this property I'm just going to sell it and of course when somebody else comes to us and says well I need to get all these into one title Unity so that I can get something done with it then we have the issue of what do we do with this PUD or do we allow it or do whatever so we just really I think we at least need to get a chance to hear from the actual owners of this property and I will be talking to some of them personally and um I think that we if we're going to be um changing the zoning and uh changing the the the feel of the neighborhood um because like I said this was a lot of mixed use and I know that You' have said don't go back to the past but the reason why eastart was like that because there were over 80 businesses in east Europe before 1965 before 1975 and after integration which actively took hold after 1975 those businesses went out of business the Little M and pop business went out of business and now we don't even we hardly have anything along Martin Luther King but there was a time when Stuart had two main street there was an East Stewart Main Street and there was a downtown Main Street we did that for about four or five years maybe six years with the East Stuart Main Street when Joan Jefferson was on the commission and Mr James Chris was on the commission and we didn't it somehow the the people who own the land especially on East Avenue and Mart Luther King uh maybe they needed help with development ideas but it wasn't happening and that Main Street went by the wayside but there is a history of a lot of mixed use of both little commercial and a little residential all beside each other little shops beside the homes the Taylor property had a shop now there's a shop on um on Mart Luther King where's I think it's Miss Gibson's property on um on East Avenue um and that shop has like two little stores inside of it and it's just um we just really need to talk to the neighborhood if and make sure that the view that we have for the community is the same view that they have and that uh everybody is going to try to work to keep the the fabric of the neighborhood we have it as an a historic African-American District hopefully that in itself and we have a board uh historic board that is there to try to collect the data for the East Stewart area and to make sure that we try to keep that what it is as a part of the fabric of our community and um that's where we are mayor commissioner go then I think we're all in agreement and we should move forward thank you thank you yeah but maybe a little more density around there could support some businesses and create help to revitalize the commercial aspects of the traditionally commercial neighborhood okay next are we done this section was my main concern in terms of chapter 3 so unless there were more concerns I'm I'm wrapped up for what and we're going to clarify the parking and the lot sizes okay and we're going to verify a date yeah yeah thank so the density you mentioned 17 units per kamik on everything is okay nothing is changing with that at me I'm not making no that's fine the 17 happened as of this moment well I think this is something to consider as well when 17 in like 2007 I think and what happened was you had the that was an issue I had before we were doing the the the the 2001 shet and the Urban overlay zones were adopted and then caused some U changes around Stewart but east Stewart wasn't keeping up with it or didn't have any of the same um interest that the rest of the community had so with the East Stewart Main Street and the concerned citizens of East Stewart was a group that had come forward and as a way to because again going back to these smaller Lots some of the people were saying well look without the 17 units an acre we can't come and do this by right because if you start doing a duplex or you start doing this other stuff you're bumping right up against the 15 units and it's too expensive for someone in East Stewart to come for a traditional PUD which is why it was all done by conditional use with a one hearing to save money on the hearing and then it was 17 units was kind of like a compromise to say look it'll give a little more by right than the rest of the community so that people can go forward on projects that would otherwise bump up against that it didn't result in any I'm not aware of a single project but with form base we have 17 and then up 30 by conditional use 17 was by right right so instead the rest of the city is 15 or 10 by right so it was 15 until the city commission so why would we not restore have 15 and whatever we're about to have compromise that we come to with our you hav't changed 15 from anywhere so we haven't changed any by right but we were talking about uh going from 30 to peeling that back okay so that's not the 17 issue that's that's St that's 30 to 17 that's but what I'm saying is going from in East Stewart just like we're doing in the sort of urban area as well doing 15 and then whatever that number is as as the density why would we have a different density a window for some affordable hous because again if we're trying to have a single family home neighborhood same kind of idea we're making this area overly dense well single family you're not going to run into a den I know but if if in some of these projects you can now have you know if we don't if we don't update the density here or by right and then up to in the conditional use like we're doing in the rest of the city we're creating an overly dense East Stewart relative to the rest of the city because we are updating it the rest of so I would say whatever we do with the urban core otherwise let's say it's 15 and 20 that's going to be our new density allowance only my only note was that it's 15 to 30 and the commission is going to give direction on what because at the first Workshop there was some discussion of 2025 it didn't it was never really finalized so I would say whatever our consensus is for the city at large we should deploy the same thing in E Stewart so it doesn't become overly dense relative to the rest of the city it wouldn't make sense but they can still come in with a PUD and ask for more right for a conditional use right but that number should reflect what we decide on the rest of the city nothing's been buil I well again that doesn't mean it hasn't I'm just not aware of it because they would have had a they could have come in and got a permit with um administratively and I wouldn't have ever seen it because it was straight so any idea I'm just saying I hate to beat this to death but from like a development standpoint if I'm a developer and I'm looking at the rest of the city right and I I get 15 and then let's say it's up to 25 or 20 but in the stward I can get 17 or 30 I just double triple you know I'm getting way more out of this area so I'm gonna I'm going to really put develop uh higher not that much property there's not that much property it's just a tailor property that has the opportunity uh larg Mr Collins is saying is that if we're going to to take away the up to 30 units per acre in the rest of the city then if you leave it up to 30 units per acre in you stew you're going to be pushing people toward East toart for development revelop so it should reflect whatever we do everywhere so so we call that a density bonus in the code so by right if it's commercial you can go up to 10 units an acre but you come before the board on a p or Comm conditional use for up to 30 multif family by right you can go to 15 units per acre but you can come before the board for up to 30 units East steart overlay Zone it's by right 17 but you can come up before the boards go up to 30 to exceed the 17 with condition approval or commission approval so in the first Workshop there was some comments about reducing 30 units an acre to a lower number the board didn't pick the number so we'll be looking for the board to give us Direction on that you can do it now or we could do it on December 9th so that would be my ask is that we deploy those same numbers towards e Stuart 15 and then whatever that number is 20 you know whatever we come up with yeah I have a question I don't even know if that you can do this but for those uh properties in East Stewart that fall below the minimum is there a way to have like a dedicated minimum side yeah for that particular group because they fall under the minimum I don't know if it's possible grandfather grandfather is that considered grandfather they are they have their own land use and Zoning so that's what we've done the East Stewart overlay Zone specifically identified that and said that's what this is they're buildable but what we're describing now is just what we're going to allow for projects that would be coming forward is is 15 units per acre by right the density or is it 17 17 is what we allowed with datase code and then it 04 sorry 04 we did that initially 17 no I think it might have been 07 yeah the 17 and then we codified it in form based again but like locked it in again so having it match whatever is in the urban area what we're talking about so 15 and then whatever number we come up with the upd again like I said let's meet with the people there and I I know I this this was done special because trying to maintain some affordable the ability for people to build and be able to to to build at a scale where they they can build uh affordable units so that people can rent for a lower price that was the whole point I think of keeping of making East Stewart um at the 17 commissioner do you have one example where the density bonuses that we've allowed has resulted in that outome I don't know I just know that that was what was done for EAS it may be the goal but all it does is create more density that ultimately these apartments still cost two 253 Grand a month it does not create affordable housing to have more density it just creates more density and more lucrative investment op that's it show me the out a little bit economy of scale not the goal the Dream is on reality of it in steuart is different we had a proposal we reject yeah the Mills affordable housing game we everything and then we won't be yeah that goal is not going to be attainable rich I I just wanted to add um in 2017 an East Stewart grro bmu was 15 and 30 in 2017 and it was 17 in sfd and East Stewart SP 17 2007 correct and then and and the form based is when I'm assuming they went to the 1730 it was so yes because I'm looking at the resolution in 2017 up to 30 it was just 17 the density bonus didn't come in until the form base was ad see I'm looking at an ordinance from 2017 maybe that's when it was adopted was right but it doesn't none of that correct and I believe that's what the form when that happened or not I mean it was we know that it's 1730 just so historically it helps yeah because the other thing is like I know like the Taylor property actually had you know 25 or 30 units on it and then the Housing Authority was above 15 units per acre as well when it built that project and how an authority is just two stories right and Taylor property could come in at three stories I think their proposal was at 1.3 can um there's a public comment as well from Paul Mr skers hi I'm Bal skyers I represent the Taylor property um my street address is 950 South counter Highway the Taylor property is on 10th Street East 10 Street we have a problem in the affordable housing Arena where the insurance companies are saying the replacement value for an abode equates to about $153 a square foot so if if if if if if if a structure unfortunately gets hit by a hurricane the insurance companies will pay about $153 to replace it per square foot but the actual construction costs for that structure is $175 to $200 a square foot if a nurse who works at the hospital wants to rent a space in a unit that somehow gets built at the $153 level that that nurse is paying somewhere around for a th000 foot house uh rental unit they're paying somewhere around 1,00 to $1,400 market rate probably higher if if a kid graduates from high school wants to get an you know an entry-level job parents want them out of the house that kids paying $1,200 a square foot to $1,500 a square foot if in fact we need that affordable class of workers in our community because they're the ones that consume the most they Buy televisions they buy cars they they they buy it's not like an old affluent person who's who's over here who's purchased everything they want in their lives already and know they're on fixed income where they don't they don't spend to to generate that disposable multiplier in your economy if we want to encourage firemen policemen um emergency people people who who take the bed pans out of mom's unit over at the hospital cleans the bed pans x-ray technicians we're going to have to be deliberate and intentional about the way we look at the housing challenge we can't just bury our head in the sand and assume somehow that $200 square foot unit is going to get built for 100 so compacting the density you know pushing down a density drives up the unit cost of those yes it does I'm I'm in the industry and and what happens is you end up having to pass the cost on to the consumer the renter the the person who lives in that space what what you want to do is create that happy balance where you get those people you get the the police officers who live in your community as opposed to saying you know something I can make more money down in Jupiter so I'm going to move out and take all this experience and training that you've given me here in Stewart and I'm going to take my skills to Jupiter you don't want that you you want the high school kid who is the assistant to the plumber okay thank you sir thank you can you just small meeting 15 seconds and I'm on okay you you want that affordable class of of individuals in your community or your economy is eventually going to die thank you sir thank you any other comments Commissioners I was just going to say Mike so you guys will be able to U be moving forward with this and in the meantime will we not so staff is not writing any code until we get the direction from putting together the recommendations based on what we talked about I mean I can go over it right now if you want if it could say time in so chapter two density bonus is up to 30 units an acre board will be applying a lower number to density amount commission recommended the bonus to be reduced to 20 yeah um there was discussion regarding 17 in E Stewart but no consensus 2.03 p06 intensity of development can I can I give context to that so where it's well these are just noes right yeah where it's 10 and 10 and Commercial is 10 mixed use is 15 so 10 and 30 you would have more like 10 and 15 and then where you have 15 and 30 it would be 15 and 20 so I so that's what you're seeing now is just to increase it by five above the right okay um when we when we had discussed that those those were my thoughts on that comment on that point that you're bringing up tapping where it's commercial development right now we can do up to 10 units per acre and you can go to 30 with the board approval Mr Collins is recommending that it be allowed to go up to 15 and not past 15 and then when it's mixed use where it starts at 15 right it'd be allowed the density bonus be allowed to go up to 20 corre but not up to 30 so the density bonus being tapped at five is what my notice I don't I don't know that I have consensus on any of it but that's why I'm going to bring it back for the vote not next week it's December 9th when it's coming back if we could for next week's already out if we could give you some consensus I think this is a workshop let's just give it the staff and no matter what I'm have to bring resolution I can keep going through it 2.0 3.06 intensity of development lot area and Flor are ratio table reference to table four is the code prior to reference that's just a comment regarding adjusting the code um there'll be a relationship between FL ratio and density no density bonus for mixed use table four addresses Flor ratio need to De need to revise to clarify also 2.0 4.02 minimum width and lot areas unless varied um uh need to remove some language in that as well also addressing minimum lot size um it mentions no residential lot less than 50 ft in width measured at the average average lot WID no plaed lot shall contain less than 4356 Square ft commission is going to be addressing that to minimum lot size of 6,000 2.0 4.02 B if two or more adjoining Lots with continuous Frontage are in a single ownership at any time such Lots individually um shall remain them they so they're not intended not to be subdivided that needs to be not lots but parcel because it's the definition of lot for plat 2.0 4.03 impervious surface currently allows up to 65% board comment was 50% um supplemental building setback requirements suggestion by board was to make setbacks 10 feet instead of 5 feet um next one is uh lots of record should be parcel of record Cottage lot language needs to be reconciled with minimum lot size when adopting it was 5,000 ft but there's also minimum lot now 4,000 56 either remove it or update it uh 2.06 point3 assisted living facilities and detox facilities should we add the county language and have a specific number um and a specific size and Define it as commercial activity uh next one is 2.06 point2 two EV charging needs to be brought up to the state statute because it's been amended next one adus must be on the same electric uh meter uh ad you not be not allowed to be occupied unless the owner of property resides on the property um duplexes and non-conforming use commission is going to provide regarding Direction regarding the 50% rule we had discussion about when those duplexes in that neighborhood when people come in to get permits they're allowed to get a permit for up to 50% of the value and um as a result they keep getting permits of up 50% of the value of what it is this year and next year so there's some language that needs to be changed there cannot expand the use cannot do more than 50% of the value at the time it became n conforming question mark on how you determine multif family F every square foot of multif family is equal to a square foot of commercial for determining Flor ratio Self Storage should only be an industrial multif family will not have shared parking with commercial half units shall be removed mixed use PUD does not density bonus based on the mixed use shared chapter three uh single family zoning duplex shall not be allowed by right be required to be approved by the commission minimum lot size and width section 30204 figure 9 E Stewart minimum lot size no minimum lot area no minimum lot width put no one describes 4365 board uh Drive wanting a minimum leas uh lot size free Stewart with an inventory we have to bring it back well property property that is grro on Tarpon should be single and right and by right and grro requires conditional use bio should be single family and not grro or grro by right uh should be conditional use duplex must be adopted by conditional use standards that we have Citywide should also apply to East Stewart as well you you include East that yep with um figure DSN 42 minimum provided parking schedule um that's you guys want the single family homes to be the same but the other uh multif family to meet the Citywide uh requirements bmu sfd and grro should be single family by right but allow the other uses by conditional use East Street bmu it is not going to be a drugstore is going to be a large building not goes a long way right off of all D oh right it's um the Fisherman's Village or whatever it's called um Central it's Park Parkway if you're heading the on your right yeah Vinnie Vinnie and Roo are but Parkway Robo yeah what would be I cannot believe yeah those but it's a very popular neighborhood I know a lot of Fisherman's Village my age well those are built I know no but I'm saying what would be the par so they would be they would be 2.5 and 2.5 so each duplex would need five Park five park right now ridiculous now it's work ridiculous it's not going to work um have I mean it's all we're just going to be putting up concrete jungle single person listen I'm I'm just reading back the notes you guys are and then um I made some notes on chapter 4 that you guys haven't talked about but I did it for my own edification I mean just it's a half of a space more than currently is you're acting like it's completely unheard of it's a has it is that's we change this not some revolutionary thing chapter six uh new construction new parking will only apply to expanded uses and new construction 603 60103 multif family parking should be increased by 05 for each criteria for example two bedroom is 2.5 spaces per unit one bedroom is two spaces per unit staff recommends the it Institute of Transportation Engineers residential combined with non-residential shall have full calculation for commercial and full calculation for residential uh 6.04 point0 2 60% should be shade trees instead of 50% example of code language can be found in the creek District 6.06 Green or LED certified properties needs to be updated or removed 6.6.1 one is relation to the signs Heights signs specifically on each Co Boulevard 15 ft versus 10t rights of way parking and right of way residents that constructed parking in the RightWay shall be allowed to maintain a license got to be open to the public um new ones has comments on it and then uh section 8.0 3.01 non-conforming uses and lots need to address the lot of record versus parcel of record platted lots have been Lots record the 20s but they're not legal Parcels under the current Zone that's the notes I have um can okay oh go on okay go on I just want to mention the whole golf cart motorcycle parking as well and when all this stuff comes back can we have like um shared parking for the golf cart motorcycle so it's not separated um that's that that's actually not in we don't we're not writing code for that we just have to make signs okay and then um I guess when this does come back to the board if we can have like historically what it was and see where the provisions are because I was on the public side when I would research ordinances and it was very difficult trying to follow it I look at Martin County Land Development code versus the city of Stewart historically the County showed all the provisions and the links worked and it just it made it so much easier I don't know what mean um when you look through Land Development code when you look at the bottom of it it'll correct it's still there ours has it correct but they all don't work by the way um then you you would just do the research and go through our codes but what you're saying you want so when I bring it back there's not going to be any link because I'm not that's when it does when it gets cified by mun code is when they put those in so we're just going to be bringing back the code as you guys are requesting it right now you guys are making the change so there isn't doesn't matter to staff what it was before it's what you wanted well I think for the public to see where the changes have been made gotcha okay okay it'll be so we'll show the actual language and then below it like in the draft we'll actually have it streen through with red line and then underlined with red will be the new language to propose to replace the old language but not the history of what it was 10 years ago it won't have that I have to do my own due diligence I guess and I don't know that well we can do it it'll take us a year just because it's nice to see I don't know how you feel rich but I know when I look at some of these past ordinances it's nice to see where things were line stried through we can we can get that but I can promise you we can't do it by January correct I mean that's trust me I know how it was when I was campaigning trying to find this stuff it was almost next to impossible to find it and now that I'm a board member um it should be nice to be able to see this stuff historically well I I know that the urban overlay zones were adopted in 1987 originally by danani and then the Kus Regional planning Council came in and did the charettes in 2001 and ultimately adopt the extensive overlay of the code in 2002 so 87 in 2002 were substantial code changes related to zoning and land use and then you have the two uh East Stewart and the creek District that were adopted in 23 and then you just have minor zoning changes along the way as it relates to you know things here and there like fences in front yards and things like that that are random but overall the substantial change was really in 2001 and in ' 87 and then these two uh form based codes in 23 if there's anything like particular I'd be happy to bring the research back but I don't know um what we're looking for what the significance of because we know what it is currently a number of parking spaces and additional spaces that um commissioner uh Collins had made a little comment that um people will park on the grass anyway or something like that I live over by finny and roolo and that's what they do over there yeah and so we had the we had the no parking on the grass ordinance but that didn't go anywhere right Mr Mort we still have that okay but they it's not it's let's put it to it's not Don't somebodys Front your yard for an hour on the grass it's not enforced no one's going to come code enforce them for that but when people are ran regularly parking their car in the middle of the of the yard if it's not on a hardened surface we code enforce it regularly and same thing with boats or everything along the side of the house those are code enforced but if we have yeah if we have if people I guess if they're going to build a new one and if if it's adopted then they'd have to meet the parking requirements but um yeah 2.5 yeah that's when you have large units and it will actually um you know come out now we have to look at we have well I if you go back and look at almost every approved development from say 2003 forward since the overlay zones were adopted where the treasure Regional planning Council wrote it intentionally to come up short so that it would require conditional approval or whatever type of use you want to call it nowadays because it changed it was a urban code exception originally and then it changed the conditional use but the purpose for that was so that the board would Grant these exceptions but also bring the the character of the community into it and ask the developer to add things to make it consistent with the city but I mention that because whatever the parking requirements were that were adopted in 2001 I would say 99% of the projects that were approved by the board required a deviation from parking so whether it's 2.5 or whether it's 2.0 per space when you start looking at the projects none of them actually met the 2.0 so they're not going to meet 2.5 either they're going to be asking for exceptions it's just going to be what the minimum standards are for the commission to approve or for administrative approval yes thank okay just bring you back on the detox okay there was langu I missed maybe it's there was the distance between ta themselves and the one that's there and the ones between private neighbor between neighborhood how close can between neighborhoods neighbor like um if it's on Federal Highway and it's the nearest neighborhood is 100 feet yeah whatever it is it's well us one is 100 feet from the neighborhoods behind it okay so I understand that distance not from the neighborhood the other fac fa facility from facility that's that's not close to a neighborhood we didn't it's going to be a butt in the land use it's going to be a butt in another land the commercial land use is going to right that's the problem us one a buts neighborhood yeah C we don't have a buffer area but the building um Frontage would not be you know would always be that it would not be closest to the neighborhood and that that added here because it came up at the workshop really one off yeah Mike uh Chris do you mind putting up that E Stewart map one more time I just wanted to add a little more clarification with regard to the single family home so can you zoom in on Central yeah so be besides if if we're coming down Central right besides these Parcels right here that are on MLK uh something that I I didn't mention that I think we should include with regard to single family home zoning is it's going to be uh down here on Central right these are all single family homes and then as well um C Central Central that's multi the people who own those property were here this morning so you'll have you'll have the um left side over here where it is but over here these are going to be homes here over Brinkley's House Central Central right they're already single family I know but they're they're currently zoned as business mixed use that's what I'm saying so the same thing that we were talking about before where by right You' be single family but uh with conditional use you could be looking at doing because traditionally there was a bait shop there and some other things but currently it's it's all those are all homes and then as well let's live to the neighborhood and that's where Mr that's where Albert's at yeah and then Albert and then below that we have um if if you look at Lake Street kind of as the line of demarcation these as well I believe are homes and then these are single family homes we have this as grro but again these should be single family hes with grro as a conditional up here yeah up there that's my church and then right here these I believe are home I could be wrong but I believe so and then down here so so just you know for for clarification these would be single family these would be these would be single family and then over here would be single family South the church and then down here um I think those are single family now yeah these are single family now but you are on so Church Street if you go up across the lake Charlotte there like right there where you're not like sh that Lake right there like that middle parcel right there um is going to be coming not there to the right but the one right below the arrow right there that's the one where they spoke earlier today um that they have it in but they're saying they're being held up they actually had gotten permit for a back court converted into free studio apartment so they need to come before the board to get a conditional use because multi family they have some setback they have density density parking landscap parking L right and is their application in no they did get their application in before the zoning in progress so again this is this is single family home with with conditional uses being right you can see the structure behind the second house there that right there has three Apartments seven yeah yeah seven I thought it was what's so that would need to be what a bmu use well it depends so right now they did not apply for anything prior to the zoning in progress it had actually been brought to their attention prior to that and for whatever reason they didn't submit any application so when you guys when they met with them they said you're going to need X parking space whatever if the code gets adopted as stated it'll be so and again I think the ones in the back are one bedroom so they'll be um one.5 instead of one space per unit I think um or I don't I can't remember what my notes for if it's for the one bedroom was two or one space I think it's 1.5 so that' be 1.5 1.5 1.5 which be 4.5 and then the two two bedrooms would be five more so it' be 9.5 so Mike why would they have to to come in front of the board though if they already have existing stuff with permit without permits like the so was it an interior permit to build a port and then they went and converted gotta so it's business makes use so it's they have a way to get an after the fact permit in to remedy it they have to get commission approval right so it would be coming forward but now prior to it coming forward staff will be saying to them you need this much parking and they're going to need EX number of shade trees as I'm looking at it I don't know if it's going to meet the 50% pervious requirement so they probably won't I don't it looks pretty close they might make but there's also as you can see the setback on the top right corner is not going to meet the 10 set right yeah um a lot of the land was taken up with the Wetland here with the lake area I don't think there's any Wetland or lake there a lot water I know but there's a parcel again sorry I mean that's got to come in front of us for a variance that was going to come either way it was built without a permit is that really what you're going to advocate for a wild west little shop and a perit above it do you need to get a permit without yeah so so those would be my my sort of pointers Mike okay Jody I've added um is there any other and I think that mostly incorporates H I'm happy to email you these notes you're going to find that they don't read I like I'm I'm kind of at living as I read my notes to you it'll be formalized in our ninth agenda for yeah it'll be every single one of them will be itemized as a resolution so we can see exactly what it's going to be we're keeping you busy please and then we'll come back with the order right in January well we have to do the crb and the L no no I am thank you trying to move the process along um okay I have a question for Mike because I'm not as familiar with all the codes as everyone here um number one we we weren't addressing I don't even know if they're in the code are these uh airbnbs State Statute St illegal for us to regulate would right but we could do some sort of code enforcement for well if they're wellend it in an email airbn being no I meant code enforcement where like they're leaving garbage there for a week that kind they do some of them leave the those yeah that's the complaints I've gotten it's like you know they have Airbnb they pick up the garbage the next day they leave it out but you should tell the neighbor all they have to do is call okay and if they call and reported to code enforcement someone will go out the next day okay of course the owner is not there that's the issue the airb people have left and the owner not we'll put the dance back for them okay oh well okay so my last is really just a comment and I understand we have a three-minute rule but to be perfectly honest I would like people when they speak to be able to finish their sentence we cut them off in mids sentence or midth thought and that's it you're done sit down I just think it's it's almost rude just let them finish their comment thank you I can tell you that we used to have a five minute R and the same thing happened so so what really happens is that to it's 10 minutes that people want to speak for and so no matter how you do it if you obviously when it's only two or three people at a public hearing it's not a big deal to go on when you have 50 people lined up to speak and it's 150 minutes at three minutes each it becomes extensive to let it go to five minutes each because that jumps 250 minutes public as opposed to 150 and you add another two hours to the meeting but I agree with your concept that if there's only a few people there we're a small little town we all you're just finishing a sentence usually we can guess of that sentence is coming and just let them finish I would ask you commissioner to go back if you'll be clearly that's not the case that people are cut off generally I I allow them to speak in yes you do but it actually happened today which is why actually and this was not during the public comment I really should not have let them come up at all and in that instance I was anxious to have them complete their com so the problem is when you start deviating you know you get into no land very quickly so it's it's a balance we try to strike and it's never perfect and I appreciate your concerns for our ability to hear the public I've been at the other end of that and wanting to finish a I have been at the other end of that myself any other comment not meeting ad Jour thank you and thank you